• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Club Sadowsky!!!

#15,121
78Jazzlover said:
BTW, hard to isolate the affect of any "guesses" too :D
Click to expand...

Not really, although you make a valid point. The only way to really tell is to build a bass with a one piece body, record it accurately, then take the bass apart, saw the body in two, reglue it, then record it in the same condition. This would need to be done across a relatively large number of instruments and a relatively large number of 'blind raters'. Of course, this will never be done.

Common sense, and the fact that literally every bass (even two identically spec'd Sadowsky's) sound a bit different, indicates that a single glue joint is most safely considered a non-issue, especially in a relatively solid body instrument.

However, since with Will Lee's are chambered and spec'd to be quite lightweight, it does not suprise me that there would be some similarities to the other lightweight, chambered basses he is comparing his Will Lee against.

IMO of course!

Edit: Been offline for a week or so... catching up!
 
#15,123
rodneyat said:
Ken...you have an opinion? That is very surprising. :hiding:
Click to expand...

:D I do love this stuff, especially when it concerns partitioning the variance of various bass components. Ever since I figured out that the whole 'neck through/bolt on' tonal difference thing was primarily driven by guys comparing Alembics and Ric's to P Basses back in the day, I've been on a crusade to stamp out 'probable spurious causal links' :p:D

If nothing else, it gives TBers something to disagree with:p
 
#15,124
KJung said:
Ever since I figured out that the whole 'neck through/bolt on' tonal difference thing was primarily driven by guys comparing Alembics and Ric's to P Basses back in the day, I've been on a crusade to stamp out 'probable spurious causal links' :p:D
Click to expand...

Or the fact that even most of the "new" neck through basses usually also have bodies with multiple laminates and the same thing on the necks...Hmmm...that does not effect tone at all. ;)

OK, back to Sadowsky talk...My P/J 5 is due to arrive tomorrow. I just hope that me or my wife happen to be here when the guys in brown show up.
 
#15,125
rodneyat said:
Or the fact that even most of the "new" neck through basses usually also have bodies with multiple laminates and the same thing on the necks...Hmmm...that does not effect tone at all. ;)

OK, back to Sadowsky talk...
Click to expand...
Whaddya mean? I just ordered an NYC neck through with a one piece body... you mean Kevin's laughter wasn't actually about being happy with a new order? Oh MAN! ;) :D :D :D :D
 
#15,126
KJung said:
It is dangerous and typically mistaken to assume a relatively arbitrary spec on a bass results in a significant portion of the tone you are hearing (in my business, that is called a 'spurious causal link'!). My guess is that the 'one piece body' has VERY little to do with what you are hearing....
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced that the spec is "relatively arbitrary".
You have to keep in mind that Roger's selection of tone wood isn't at all random. Now this is only a stab in the dark, BUT, many luthiers do a "tap test" on planks when determining which portions of that plank are suitable for an application. Could it be that Roger's body blank supplier has determined that certain portions of the planks are more resonant & not to be "split"? Just sayin'
 
#15,127
Fuzzbass said:
Is it plain white? Perhaps you could try parchment or mint instead. The difference between these and white-white is subtle, but if you're looking for less harshness then it might just be the answer.
Click to expand...

I am fairly certain the current PG is parchment. Here's my attempt at mint:

sadwMint.gif
 
#15,128
P. Bass said:
I'm not convinced that the spec is "relatively arbitrary".
You have to keep in mind that Roger's selection of tone wood isn't at all random. Now this is only a stab in the dark, BUT, many luthiers do a "tap test" on planks when determining which portions of that plank are suitable for an application. Could it be that Roger's body blank supplier has determined that certain portions of the planks are more resonant & not to be "split"? Just sayin'
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it goes the other way around.

I don't think it's a case of planks all being big, and some are split and some aren't. I'm pretty sure it's more the case that very few planks are wide enough and also thick enough at the same time... and if they are, they simply aren't split, because there's no need to, and the fact that there simply aren't that many planks big and thick enough, is what makes it unusual.

Depending on builder/luthier prefs, they may not even require the glue joint to be down the center (which I think is purely a cosmetic decision). Some could simply glue enough to one side to make the slab just big enough to cut a body blank from. I think that's mainly because with these wood dimensions, I don't think alternating grain being equally distributed on either side of the glue joint is that important (like it would be for a larger and likely thinner multi-piece table top, for example.)

You are correct about the "tap test" tho. I do know some builders/luthiers do that when going through wood selection.
 
#15,130
P. Bass said:
I'm not convinced that the spec is "relatively arbitrary".
You have to keep in mind that Roger's selection of tone wood isn't at all random. Now this is only a stab in the dark, BUT, many luthiers do a "tap test" on planks when determining which portions of that plank are suitable for an application. Could it be that Roger's body blank supplier has determined that certain portions of the planks are more resonant & not to be "split"? Just sayin'
Click to expand...

+1 to Vic's comment that it is probably the other way around. However, your point is valid in that EVERY piece of wood sounds different... much more going on than attributing a major sonic influence to a single glue joint IMO:D
 
#15,135
KJung said:
It is dangerous and typically mistaken to assume a relatively arbitrary spec on a bass results in a significant portion of the tone you are hearing (in my business, that is called a 'spurious causal link'!). My guess is that the 'one piece body' has VERY little to do with what you are hearing. Most likely, it is the very light weight ( believe the Will Lee's are Sadowsky's lightest offering... swamp ash, chambered) and chambering of your particular bass that moves it slightly closer to the acoustic signature of the other very lightweight and chambered body basses you are comparing it to.
Click to expand...

Whatever, Ken. :rolleyes:

It is "dangerous and typically mistaken" to put words into someone else's mouth. :p I was merely commenting that it is "interesting" that my bass feels extremely resonant. More likely it might be due to the very light weight (7.8 lbs.) which is light compared even to most NYCs and was at my request. I have no idea if the one-piece body even has anything at all to do with it -- in fact, I wasn't even sure it was a one-piece body until recently. But I think all of this speculation is somewhat useless -- as you've noted, all wood sounds different, and while I'd trust Roger's opinion, I don't think most of the rest of us have nearly enough experience in handling the hundreds of wood bodies that would make for a statisically significant sampling, even in anecdotal form.
 
#15,138
rodneyat said:
I had an older NYC alder/morado P/J 5 a couple of years ago. It was a great bass but it just never quite did it for me. So, I've played a couple of ash/maple P/J5's since then and been blown away. And, now that they offer vintage tint on the Metro...I just could not pass this one up..especially at just under 9lbs!
Click to expand...
I had a similar experience, except it was with an NYC alder/brazilian. I'd played one of the ash/maple PJ4's at NAMM and been blown away by it, so I went on a quest to find a deal on an NYC PJ5 (Metros in 5 weren't available yet). While it was amazing, it didn't have the same magic for me personally as the one I played at NAMM. When the 5's came out, I had Kevin watch for a burst ash/maple one that was 9 pounds or less. Well, when it came along, and I finally got my hands on it, oh yeah, there it was... the sound I remembered.

Just wait, dude... just wait. :)
 
#15,140
BartmanPDX said:
Whatever, Ken. :rolleyes:

It is "dangerous and typically mistaken" to put words into someone else's mouth. :p I was merely commenting that it is "interesting" that my bass feels extremely resonant. More likely it might be due to the very light weight (7.8 lbs.) which is light compared even to most NYCs and was at my request. I have no idea if the one-piece body even has anything at all to do with it -- in fact, I wasn't even sure it was a one-piece body until recently. But I think all of this speculation is somewhat useless -- as you've noted, all wood sounds different, and while I'd trust Roger's opinion, I don't think most of the rest of us have nearly enough experience in handling the hundreds of wood bodies that would make for a statisically significant sampling, even in anecdotal form.
Click to expand...

+1 all the way. I misinterpreted your post as saying that you believed the one piece body was the 'cause' of the tonality that you heard, since that was the topic we were discussing.

Per my point before, the very lightweight (under 8 pounds), chambered bodied ash Sadowsky's I've played (and owned) did have that 'resonance' you are discussing... similar as you point out to my Rob Allens when played acoustically. Not my thing, but that's what you seem to get with super lightweight (under 8 pound) instruments for the most part.... IMO and much IME.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back